Hi guys,
On my travels around town today I saw a bumper sticker on a pick-up, it read:
“Chevy, Ford or Dodge
who really cares,
just get a life!”
Oooops I didn’t pay attention, don’t know what make the pick-up was! 
But certainly no rivets that I noticed!
Ray Dunakin said:Very intersting thought !
I think what people object to is when Person A denigrates Person B's models (whether scratchbuilt or store-bought) simply because they don't meet Person A's chosen standard of accuracy.
Both David, first let me say that I admire greatly the work that you and others do over in the Master Class forum elsewhere. There is some truly great models that come out of there. And I will say that I have never been ridiculed by anybody over my modeling in any of these forums. BUT…there are jackasses within the modeling fraternity that believe that if you don’t model a specific prototype and down to the last rivet in their scale, then you are not a modeler. I have been ridiculed by them…and it only takes one to put a sour taste in your mouth. To put it bluntly, there was one time at a train show that one jackass caused me to redline MY boiler pressure…
More than one club member was sure I was going to throttle the guy. There have been other incidents too. And as Tim stated, most of these guys that are critical of others couldn’t build their way out of a box and have nothing to show for their efforts. I’ve never had someone that was a true craftsman and modeler condemn my work.
Ray Dunakin said:
.............................I think even the most casual model railroader would not object to manufacturers producing more accurate models. (Except maybe when greater accuracy limits the model’s ability to run on the average layout.)
I think what people object to is when Person A denigrates Person B’s models (whether scratchbuilt or store-bought) simply because they don’t meet Person A’s chosen standard of accuracy.
Good point about the casual modeler, the guys who don’ count the nits will still buy it, it looks OK to them.
The guys who count the nits won’t, unless the nits are “fairly close”.
On the denigration: hmmmm how many times would one read that it is a “fairly close model” - I’m talking about store bought. “Fairly close” is about as accurate an expression as slightly pregnant.
If B thinks it’s great, fine. Just don’t try to tell A and the rest of the gang that it is a “fairly close model”, chances are that someone in the “fraternity” will know which prototype it is supposed to represent and as soon as the actual comparing starts i.e. the basic three dimensions, the jig will be up, because it is possible that it isn’t a “fairly close model”.
Tim,
I for one enjoy your bashes although I may not comment. I just don’t post as much as I used to on any forum. Keep doing what you’re doing! My first bash was an LGB Staniz into an OR&L 4-4-0, then came a early Big Hauler into OR&L #111 along with the failures which made my junk box overflow. Now thanks to Fletch’s Master Classes I’m doing the engineering first. My Bachmann fodder of choice is now the “Connie”. Four bashed into OR&L locos so far and three more on the bench plus one “Annie”. I quit trying to build accurate scale models years ago. I’m happy with good representations of the original. Any criticism of your work is likely a form of envy. Keep it up!
Jeff Livingston
Kaneohe, Hawaii
Thanks for the responses Tim and others.
I agree, that kind of critism is out of hand and innapropriate. I know these types exist, and had to deal ignornance too, but you know I’ve rarely seen it in the forums in reponse to someone’s model…lots of arguments in the forums, but rarely seen anyone critised for choosing to build the model they did! That folks sent you e-mails to denegrate you work Tim is shocking.
I have a 2 strikes and you’re out mentality when it comes to angry or particularly stupid e-mails. I resond the 2nd time by not answering them, rather simply stating “Your e-mail address is now added to my spam list”, I never get another e-mail from them (even if they tried to e-mail I’d never know it!). Some of the rants sent are as good as Spam in their lack of knowlege and idiocy, so I dont waste my time trying to answer them anymore.
Rarely had to do it, but had to earlier in the year when I was badly slammed by ignorant idiots who didn’t want my prototype info about 1870s Baldwin colour schemes being applied to certain brass models in addition to the plain black ones which were always to be made anyway! It brought out the worst in some, and I know who I never want to meet in person!
Anyway, just finishing up another Porter loco, another tiny 1877 2-6-0 in wine and brown colour scheme!
David.
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:Yep. As I see it, criticism of a manufactured model is fair game as long as it's in the nature of a review, generalized opinion, etc. I.E., not directed toward owners of that model in a way which implies they're idiots for wasting their time/money on it. Unfortunately sometimes people take any criticism of a manufacturer's product personally regardless of intent.
On the denigration: hmmmm how many times would one read that it is a "fairly close model" - I'm talking about store bought. "Fairly close" is about as accurate an expression as slightly pregnant. If B thinks it's great, fine. Just don't try to tell A and the rest of the gang that it is a "fairly close model", chances are that someone in the "fraternity" will know which prototype it is supposed to represent and as soon as the actual comparing starts i.e. the basic three dimensions, the jig will be up, because it is possible that it isn't a "fairly close model".
Dennis Paulson said:To follow up on this, link-and-pin couplers lasted far longer on narrow gauge lines than on standard gauge lines. The Railroad Safety Appliances Act of 1893 mandated automatic brakes and couplers for all railroads involved in interstate commerce. By and large, the standard gauge lines quickly settled into compliance not so much because the Act forced them to, but because they had to in order to be able to operate with their connecting railroads. Narrow gauge lines didn't have that pressure, so were far less inclined to undergo the expense to convert.
Link and pins were used till around 1873 or so , and even till much later on logging railroads ...
In truth, the Act had no teeth until it was amended in 1908, finally giving the Secretary of Transportation the legal authority to go after non-compliant railroads. (Think of it as a 15 year grace period.) At that point, many narrow gauge lines acquiesced and converted, while others (like the EBT) fought it tooth and nail. Arguments against converting ranged from financial hardships to claims that narrow gauge lines weren’t involved in interstate commerce, therefore weren’t bound by the Act. In the EBT’s case, they ran out of excuses, and began adding automatic couplers to their equipment in 1911. It took them until 1919 to get all their equipment converted to automatic couplers and air brakes. Other narrow gauge lines, like the Monson (Maine) and Mann’s Creek (W. VA) were successful in arguing that they were industrial lines, therefore exempt. They kept their link-and-pin couplers up to the very end.
Note also that the Act didn’t specify which types of automatic equipment was to be added, just that it had to be automatic. That’s why some narrow gauge lines like the Ohio River & Western, and Waynesburg & Washington stayed with Eames vacuum brakes.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I love to see freelance locos. In my opinion, it takes just as much talent to successfully pull off a freelance loco as it does a model of an existing prototype, if not more. With a model of an existing prototype, you need only model what exists in photos and drawings. You don’t necessarily have to know what things are or why they are there. When you build a freelance model to any level of fine detail, you need to know that kind of stuff in order to make the model believable. There’s also nothing wrong with not building to any level of fine detail. As was stated earlier, modeling is every bit an artform, and no two people do things the same way. I personally prefer modeling to a level of fine detail, but that’s just me. It doesn’t keep me from appreciating the work of others.
The key is knowing what the modeler is trying to accomplish. Therein lies the crux of Tim’s lament–folks not understanding the intent of the modeler. In another thread on operations, there was a discussion about the efficacy of a garden railroad, and whether it needs to have a “garden” to be considered adequate. The answer is “no,” if the builder doesn’t deem it so. None of us do this to please others, so why waste our energies worrying about it, eh? If your results are what you want, and you’re proud of it, who are we to knock you down?
Later,
K
I’ll throw my 2c in here, too. I think “Rivet Counters” is a hot word, and sometimes people get caught up in it. I dont consider my self a rivet counter, but I do like to make MY OWN MODELS accurate on occasion. I would NEVER criticize someone else’s modeling because of any inaccuracy. Hell, no 2 boxcars are alike, even when built to ‘standards’, so whats to criticize?
Some friends fro our area now with the US Army in Germany sent me a notebook a couple of years ago they found over there with JAN 1952- JAN 1953 MR’s.
In one is a cartoon, a draftsman at his table with a big sign outside the window about “Locomotive Manufacturing”.
Boss leaning over his should saying:
“Throw in a lot of unnecessary details. It will drive the model railroaders crazy!”
That said, there is about a prototype for everything.
One of the issues of outdoor running is 1:1 scenery.
On that tender rivet count…who is to say some roundhouse worker didn’t drill and rivet ONE extra on ONE prototype tender at some point?
One of the issues of outdoor running is 1:1 scenery.
Yes like this AM , after the storm last night , to scale size , logs had to be cleared off the tracks and leaves 10- 15 feet across , also . [ twigs , small branches and leaves ] Then operation was back to normal .
It could have been a full day of operations , to round up a wreak train , clean up and cut up the mess , and load into gondolas for removal , I guess I missed a operational chance at a storm damage clean up train …
To me, someone like Bob, who attempts to model as accurately as possible, is a “Fine Scale Modeler.” A “rivet counter” is someone who negatively criticizes someone else’s attempt at modeling. That is why I carry the bag of rivets. Whenever someone starts negatively criticizing my poor attempt, or that of one of my friends, I offer him the bag. It never fails to shut them up. Fortunately, it is a rare occurrence.
SteveF
Steve Featherkile said:Well said! You nailed the distinction perfectly.
To me, someone like Bob, who attempts to model as accurately as possible, is a "Fine Scale Modeler." A "rivet counter" is someone who negatively criticizes someone else's attempt at modeling.
Thats an excellent definition Steve,
Pity some people critise some of us interested in that higher level of detail as being ‘rivet counters’, yet I dont believe I’ve done anything but encourage model building, regardless of the level. It works both ways!
David.
David Fletcher said:
Thats an excellent definition Steve, Pity some people critise some of us interested in that higher level of detail as being 'rivet counters', yet I dont believe I've done anything but encourage model building, regardless of the level. It works both ways!David.
Spot on!
I never built one of your projects and I never will - not my type of railroading - but one can certainly learn a lot about different techniques by reading/following along with those projects.
Going to shows, open houses or ordinary get-togethers I always look for the “not-so-ordinary” features, techniques and approaches. My usual opener: “That is different, how (or why) did you do that?” Learned a lot of “stuff” that way.
Well to complete my part of the discussion- I today finished the model of Colorado Central RR, Porter #7, built as a 2-6-0 in 1877. This is how she might have looked when built new out of the Porter Bell factory. I had considerable help from Historian Jim Wilke on the paint scheme that might have been used at that time by Porter. Built atop a Bachmann ‘Indy’ 2-6-0 chassis, the superstructure is all styrene etc.
This to accompany the sister loco CCRR #4, built 1873. This one represents the #4 as rebuilt by the UP in either late 1883, or early 1884, prior to the UP adopting an all black paint scheme in 1885.
and I’m developing some 1870s duck-bill cars to go with them, the next series after the Carter Bros cars I developed last year as laser kits. here’s the prototype CCRR baggage car, two coaches to follow:
Rivet counting? Nope, just the desire to design, detail and model locomotives based on prototypes that existed and added in their own way to the history of an area. I also like to represent locomotive design, both form and decoration how the original designers setout to do. That can be quite a lot of fun. Having done freelance and prototypical models, I dont think there is any difference in difficulty from a detailing standpoint - Understanding of the pipes, details etc is never about just coping a photos without knowing what you’re looking at. So there is no literal difference there. From my standpoint, I find prototype modelling a tad more difficult as you have to start out with a clear vision based on drawings, research and colourschemems/decoration and end exactly there…you cant let the plastic, model’s development etc alter the outcome…where freelancing, I’ve tended to let the model tell me how it wants to look, and often times that may well be a long way from where I started…it just sort of grows, and the path you follow is to achieve a certain look, rather than be unrelenting to scale and detail per specific drawings and specs. If one were to design a freelance model at the outset on paper etc, and then model from that to match it, then there would be no difference at all in difficulty. Enjoy, David.
As always , absolutely beautiful . Thanks
BTW LSCers, as an alternative to Steve’s bag of rivets for them to count; how about a well detailed Z-scale car? Should work beautifully for the LS rivet counters.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
David
Anyone who would criticise your models need to be thrashed with a 5 foot section of flextrack
You need to specify 332.